He asked you to imagine if this had been a man kissing a woman. Having an intimate moment like that interrupted and degraded would hurt just as much. The end result could very well have been the same. This was a problem of society not knowing to respect a person's boundaries, and not valuing basic human decency.

Okay but no - these are not equivalent scenarios. Is the violation of privacy reprehensible in both situations? Is the problem of society not respecting boundaries a thing? Absolutely. But you're off-base in suggesting that's what the crux of this issue is. The crux of the issue is the societal homophobia and ostracizing on top of violation of privacy. When this happens to a heterosexual couple, they feel violated, no doubt - but it's hardly scandalous. But the gay couple have to live every day struggling against a society that degrades and dehumanizes them and says they are deviant and wrong and immoral. They have to walk past people holding signs telling them that they are going to be tortured for eternity (as if this existence weren't torturous enough). They have to turn on the news and see the congresspeople that supposedly represent them deny them basic human rights. They exist in a world of constant pressure.

For the heterosexual couple, it's an invasion of privacy. For the homosexual couple, it's an invasion of privacy in addition to a lifetime of being battered, abused, and put under constant pressure.

You see the difference now?

You remind me of the people who join go down to the gun range for a few weeks. And then start comparing themselves to soldiers.

World of difference.

The fact you even think the situations can be thought of as equal shows how very little you understand the issue.

I always laughed at the concept of the closet. I thought it was ridiculous, because I didn't care about being socially ostracized.

 

Smeag's other quoting of you made a good point, but I also want to point out that this is an oversimplification of the issue; being a social outcast is essentially a best case scenario for lgbtq+ people. Worst case scenarios range from assault to murder. It's because of those things Smeag said, the degrading, and dehumanizing, and all of that. That makes a world of difference, and that's why they stay in the closet. Coming out of the closet is a much greater risk than you realize, and I hope you come to understand that.

I think you express a wonderful sentiment here. Expressing sympathy towards basically everyone might not be enough for some people, but I think most people would find it to be rather nice.

My only comment on the title: Dear St. Nicholas, not again.

Yeah, I've been there before. Not on a romantic level or anything (I have never dated a day in my life, so that drama eludes me completely), but there have been moments when people in my life don't initially support large decisions of mine. That or they're just unaware of the full picture and jump to conclusions and make a fuss over nothing.

Though, with family, at least in my case, they always have the family's best intentions in mind... somewhere... filed deep down in the darkest corners of their souls (Akano, if you're reading this, just know I still love you anyway. =P). I'm a part of the family, so it's not always about me. Sometimes someone acts up or falls down or just needs a hand.

Simply put, they're my family and I love them. Do I keep my secrets? Sure I do. Do they tell me everything? No, they don't. I've even been hurt before because they didn't tell me about a family emergency until I called that person and found out they were in the hospital. That was fun day... and by fun I mean Karz. 8D (and by 8D I mean D8).

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter because I'm stuck with these people for the rest of my life. We can bicker, keep secrets, make fun and even fist fight, but they will always be my family and I can count on them for anything.

So, for now I'll keep my secrets, and I trust they'll keep theirs. Part of being an adult is figuring out how to deal with difficult situations. It could be deciding to get married, choosing a future career path, breaking terrible news to one another or simply asking for help when you need it.

Every family has quirks and oddities, but no matter how much it might make you scared or shy away they're still family and that's a bond that outlives the unimportant stuff. (Though, if it does actually make pretty big waves, that probably just means you're onto something important. Also, best of luck with the introductions, Kraggh! ^^).

And once again, the typical lines are being drawn.

Admin riot squads should be right on schedule then.

Actually, so far I think the discussion is fine. Everyone is being calm while explaining their viewpoints and feelings, keeping discussion civil and productive. I hope this will continue. Some staff members are keeping an eye on this entry, though.

Perhaps I should have clarified this in the entry (but I don't think through everything when writing these, so that's what the comments section is for), I believe that my situation has some parallels with what closet homosexuals go through, since they connect on a larger issue, but I wouldn't consider these issues to be the same. I just see similarities, which therefore make them comparable, and I don't think that's wrong. For those who think I'm wrong, I'm a bit frustrated, because at this point it's getting very difficult to know what to say. I mean, some people think that they are lines being drawn, but I don't see lines.

Let me paraphrase this entry: I am pursuing a relationship, and because I passionately care that people should have healthy relationships with all the important people in their lives, the struggles I go through make me sympathize more for closet homosexuals, even though they aren't exactly like me.

McSmeag, I want you to understand that I see the difference. So did Leonard Pitts, Jr., but his objective wasn't to comment on homophobia. He just looked at the event and understood that it wasn't the only problem. Same with me. Fighting homophobia and sexism might be your passion, but please don't let that passion blind you from seeing the larger picture. I don't think that homophobia is the root of all evil, nor is bigotry. I think that those can be sourced back to larger problems, and I like to spend time contemplating the larger, unseen evils that blacken humanity. My schtick, at least on this blog, is tackling "personal isolation". Inspired by songs from Simon and Garfunkel, I see mankind suffering an inability to communicate on an emotional and spiritual level, which I think is a huge problem, and this entry is geared more toward that. I bring homophobia into it somewhat, for the sake of tying in other issues (especially ones that fit into the psychological language of BZPower) and showing some relation, but solving homophobia is hardly my main concern. I leave that to other people on this site. Besides, I have come to find that my commentary is hardly appreciated and often misunderstood, since I comment on the issue using a very different language than its most passionate supporters and I approach my conclusions from a very different worldview and personal experience that would inherently show if I started discussing society's homophobic problems too much. Pretty soon, homophobia becomes a proxy argument for settling a greater philosophical point.

So basically: I really think that people should have healthy relationships with the people they have fundamental connections with, primarily family, but also other loved ones. It upsets me that sometimes family doesn't always connect, which is something that matters a lot to me because I come from a broken family. There's a lot of suspicion, and not a lot of acceptance. It breaks my heart. That's something I don't want anyone to ever go through.

24601

 

Honestly.

Since you seem completely and utterly unaware of the implications of what you posted, I suppose I'll have to explain it to you. You are one to talk about being blinded, since you seem unable to grasp anything that has been said to you about this. Anything that disagrees with you at least.

First off, the situations are not comparable. They exist on totally different levels. One might embarrass you a bit. On one hand, some chap got a picture taken of him kissing his girlfriend. Fine. He’ll be embarrassed for a week at most. Whatever. Big whoop. I got pictures taken of me dozing off in class once. It was even up on removed. Guess what? In a day or two it was over. That was the worst of it.

When someone who is gay, in the closet, gets a picture taken of them kissing their boyfriend, girlfriend, whatever, they can be denied jobs because of it. Legally. They can expect to be bombarded with emails, hatemail mostly, they can expect to be told they can burn in a certain fiery place for a good long time because of it. Or even worse, they have certain blind fools tell them, lovingly and gently, that they’re hated by a deity because of it and they need to change or else. They could be sent to glorify brainwashing camps because of it. In short, one results in a day or mild uncomfortable sensations. The other can straight up ruin someone’s life.

They cannot be compared. The mere fact you say something that hurts, kills and otherwise ruins other people is less important to you then airing out your own personal problems (as you did in this blog) shows such a fundamental lack of respect that it staggers the mind.

 

He is saying that he sympathizes more with those in the closet due to his own experience with having to hide his feelings. Please explain how that is so terrible, because I'd really like to know how sympathizing with people is a bad thing. It may feel a little bit better to pull out the pitchforks and torches because he doesn't agree with you 100% on everything, but I don't think doing that is founded on the facts here.

I think what is happening here really does draw back to his argument - that many of the ills of our society is that people just can't communicate with each other. I think if people actually did try to communicate with each other instead of pulling out the pitchforks because they disagree, we'd find a lot more common ground and get a lot more done. But when you can't even sympathize with people, we have a problem.

can I just say that I've almost killed myself twice because of the closet

and that I really do not appreciate these things that you are saying in your entry here

Kraggh, I don't mean to insult you at all and I certainly don't mean to imply that you can't draw parallels between the scenario - but I do ask that you be aware of the delicacy of making such a comparison, and how doing so indelicately can belittle the gravity of something (in this case, the pressures of societal homophobia).

Reading your entry, it looked to me like you were purporting an equivalence between the two - your phrasing and tone suggested this. You're speaking here of "using different language," but if your language is continually causing you to be misunderstood, perhaps you should consider altering it? Again, I don't mean this in an insulting manner...I'm trying to help, from the other side of the fence here.

You also have to understand that when you're speaking (or posting) in a community, your words are inherently viewed through the lens of your past words. Everything you've said and done in the past is naturally going to provide context, because people understand each other through interaction. And, it has to be said, you've posted multiple essays with strong misogynistic or not-LGBTQ-friendly undertones. Perhaps they were unintentional; I can't judge that - I can only judge what I read and see. But that context remains in place for anyone viewing subsequent content.

This is not at all to say that growth is ignored - indeed, it's what we all should strive for. I was raised in a homophobic familial environment. I know I've said things that are homophobic in the past unintentionally, even as I was hiding my own "deviant" gender issues from my family/friends/etc. Indeed, I still may sometimes unintentionally say homophobic or misogynistic things, despite how ardently feminist and pro-equality I am (and despite being on the queer spectrum myself), because that's the effect of being in a sexist, patriarchal society. This stuff is ingrained into us socially, which is why it's so insidious. We all have privilege we are unaware of.

But we can grow from that, and growth should be encouraged. And I can understand being frustrated when people are angry, and you're trying to grow and learn, but everything you say seems to be met with hostility. But this is where you (and by you I really mean everyone, myself included, when faced with this scenario) need to swallow your pride, and instead of rebutting, try to understand why people are angry - and ultimately, correcting the behaviour in yourself, and reaching a greater understanding.

Sympathy is a good starting point, and if I'm understanding your clarifications, that's what you were shooting for with this entry. A key is understanding the difference between sympathy and empathy and being supportive regardless. I'd also encourage less of a focus on the "big picture," as you've discussed here...that sort of argument works in purely philosophical discourse, but like far too much of philosophical discourse, it falls flat when applied to real humans in reality. Homophobia and misogyny and transphobia may be subsets of even larger social issues - but we can't just ignore them in favour of the larger, because they're things that are directly hurting people, every day, and they need to be addressed. I hope I'm being clear here. Just be wary of applying abstract philosophy to real practice - more often than not, it just belittles the issues at hand and helps no-one. You get what I'm saying?

These issues are very real and very dire to a lot of us. I've been in the closet for the better part of two decades. I'm stuck with clinical depression and anxiety problems and aborted suicide attempts that I can't forget, in no small part due to that closet and that pressure. Sympathy is appreciated - but please understand the gravity of it and the sensitivity of the issue, you see?

 

"I sympathize with the fellows in Nagasaki*. I broke my glass of water this morning. It hurt. The people in Nagasaki are hurting. So the problems are alike."

That statement should explain just about everything wrong with this sort of attitude. The differences between those problems are so vast, and the thing he is comparing his own issue to is so very different and so very much worse, that it seems very very clear that he doesn’t understand it all. Everyone hides their emotions. Everyone. Otherwise we’d have people sobbing in the streets. It isn’t a huge problem, that he considers his own problem to be in anyway similar to the life-threatening situation gays find themselves in speaks volumes.

It’s painfully out of touch, it’s clear he didn’t do any research into this very very sensitive issue and has little idea what the victims of homophobia go through on a daily basis.

*Circa 1945 of course.

 

What I see you arguing is akin to saying that, circa 1945, it would be invalid to oppose racism because you were bullied in school, and thus empathized with people that were being bullied to an extreme degree all the time. I don't think that sort of argument makes much sense at all.

People draw sympathy from all sorts of things, and personal experience is one of them. I don't see sympathizing with people to be a bad thing.

Sociologists believe that, as much as our diversity is to be celebrated, we all have a lot more in common than that which makes us different. I believe that philosophy, and I'm trying to be as color-blind here as I can, with no intentions of disrespect. Things would be so much easier if others could understand that, because this is the first time on this site that I have ever stood up to try and clear out those misconceptions.

Basilisk compared getting violated during a passionate, intimate moment with the person you love to getting caught sleeping in class. Those two scenarios are difficult to compare. As much as homosexuality plays heavily on the minds of some, I try to make it clear that when I see these things I intend to be colorblind, so I see try to see what's universal about these situations, what can be applied to anyone else. What I see is that it is wrong to violate the intimate areas of someone's life, and that society today doesn't respect that is a problem. The incident with that college student isn't one-dimensional; it is three-dimensional and complex because humanity is three-dimensional and complex. My exegesis of this event, in order to be as objective as possible, has to see all the factors at play. This is a life we're talking about, and life is more than just a single narrative point. The narrative point that stood out to me the most, based off of my own experiences, was the pain of having an intimate, passionate area of my life violated.

That happened once on this site. I got attacked for feelings that I had. To be fair, my feelings were not entirely healthy, because in hindsight I am very wary of infatuation. Regardless, being scorned and talked down upon on this site hurt me. A lot. Very few insults on this site ever hurt me, but those relating to my romantic life hit me so hard that it took me years to get over. For several months, I was deep in hardcore depression. I learned a lot from that experience, and I've changed a lot since then. Perhaps my perpetual sarcasm on this site would lead people to believe otherwise, but trust me when I say that the personality I project on BZPower is nothing like how I am in real life, so nobody here can even in the slightest degree claim that they know me. That's probably a good thing, since what they think of me doesn't matter (though I have and always will carefully listen to all opinions to scratch what truth I can from them).

The event with the college student has more to it than just homophobic rejection. I think it would be wrong to view it only in those terms. Since I am only partially qualified to talk about the struggles of homosexualiy, I talk about what I do know. On that level, I see similarities between myself and this individual, and probably many other people. Society's lack of respect for intimate relationships is a problem that I notice a lot more. That's the fight I take up. And I really hope that others care as much as I do. If they don't, that's fine, so long as they care about something.

EDIT: People posted in-between starting and finishing this post.

Ryuujin, I'm very sad to hear that. I really hope that suicide never tempts you in the future, nor is it anywhere in your mind.

McSmeag, regarding my language, what I mean by that is that I speak with an obvious perspective, and I can tell that people can sense the angle I approach things from. I don't talk about these issues in the same way that people like you do, and I hate to say it, but others pick up on those differences and stop trusting me. Which is exactly what's going on here. As it happens, you do not believe that I should spend time contemplating the root of all these evils (and it's very possible that if we were to discuss the root of all evil, we'd come to different conclusions), and with my top-down strategy for dealing with society's imperfections.

Regarding any misogynistic or homophobic undertones people have interpreted in my writings in the past, there's a difference between undertones and overtones. If those were there, then they are surely unintentional. I have also said many things that have been very positive and supportive to women, homosexuals, and other groups of people, though those have often gone overlooked, or there have been philosophical disagreements about what equality looks like (indeed, regarding feminism, there is no set understanding of what femininity is, and in order to fully engage in that topic we would need to brave discussion about human nature that isn't right for BZPower). As for the sarcastic entries, I apologize for all of them. It's difficult to convey my particular sense of inherited humor over the internet, and I'm learning to refrain myself on BZP.

I am not going to change my voice (perhaps that's a better term than "language"). Unless the fundamentals of my beliefs change, I will continue to come at things from the angle I have been thus far. That might incite some people, but if I recall, the particular voice of other feminists on this site has also been a bit divisive, so I only apologize so much.

Thank you for your commentary, however. You basically understand what I'm getting at here, and you yourself have a unique perspective. I give you all due respect, and I try to speak as candidly on social issues we mutually care about, though since I am obviously not in your position I will never be completely in tune with you.

24601

Kraggh, I think one of the underlying issues with how you're approaching this, and why people are getting hurt and offended by it, lies here:

I'm trying to be as color-blind here as I can

I understand where you're coming from, and indeed I'm a HUGE proponent of promoting unity between everyone - I concur that we all have more in common than we have different. It's one of the roots of my strong pacifism.

However, there's a difference between unity and homogeneity, and it's very hurtful to confuse the two. We should never strive to be "colour-blind" - we should be aware and accepting of individual/racial/sexual/gender/etc differences. Yes, we all have vast swaths of shared experiences, but the different experiences that we have, in large part of sex, gender, race, or income level, are also very important in colouring who we are, and what the ramifications of a given scenario are.

Ignoring race/sex/gender, being "blind" to it - that's bad. That's whitewashing, and inadvertently belittling of different circumstances (despite it usually being completely unintentional, which I understand).

Treating all races/sexes/genders and equal and being aware of the different circumstances and acknowledging and understanding them - that's what we all need to strive for. Do you see the difference?

As for the issue of personal invasion - I don't think anyone is suggesting that isn't a problem, and didn't have a part to play in the referenced incident. HOWEVER - I think we are all saying that the very prominent role of societal homophobia int his issue cannot be underplayed. In particular, I take umbrage with the suggestion that "it could have had the same result" with a heterosexual couple. Maybe in an outlying case, but a heterosexual couple's experience with something like this is very different from a homosexual couple's. That's what I'm trying to explain here.

I’ve seen people making out in the halls of my high-school. Forgive me if I view having a picture taken of you whilst making out with someone to be a relatively minor problem (if that) to something that can, again, straight up kill someone. The issue you brought up and then explicitly compared to the absolute seething hades many LGBT people have to go through on a daily basis seems, to me, to be somewhat small in comparison. The tone you took, and are taking, seems to marginalize the immense and horrible amount of suffering people go through because of omophobia.

I think that certain individuals commenting on this blog post are a tad too used to debates on issues pertaining to LGBTQ issues that are doomed from the start to descend into a horrific, bloody conflagration, and therefore, perhaps, don't know what to do with one that is not predestined for bloodshed.

The comparison between the heterosexual couple and the homosexual couple having their privacy invaded is a limes-to-oranges comparison, and applies rather more readily than the apples-to-oranges of Basilisk's comparison. That being said, while invasion of privacy is an issue in both cases, the troubles faced by someone unwillingly outed as a homosexual in a hostile environment - and the drunks that permeate many college classrooms are nothing if not hostile, to homosexuals and a great many other people - are rather more long-term than the universal troubles of a young couple who've had an intimate moment violated. For the latter, they will be indignant, embarrassed, and may, for a time, be rather more wary than usual. For the former, there is the distinct possibility of a reputation utterly and permanently ruined.

With that out of the way, I hope that your fears are worse than the truth of the situation you have described in your personal life, and that the problems you face are resolved to your satisfaction.

 

 

"I sympathize with the fellows in Nagasaki*. I broke my glass of water this morning. It hurt. The people in Nagasaki are hurting. So the problems are alike."

That statement should explain just about everything wrong with this sort of attitude. The differences between those problems are so vast, and the thing he is comparing his own issue to is so very different and so very much worse, that it seems very very clear that he doesn’t understand it all. Everyone hides their emotions. Everyone. Otherwise we’d have people sobbing in the streets. It isn’t a huge problem, that he considers his own problem to be in anyway similar to the life-threatening situation gays find themselves in speaks volumes.

It’s painfully out of touch, it’s clear he didn’t do any research into this very very sensitive issue and has little idea what the victims of homophobia go through on a daily basis.

*Circa 1945 of course.

 

 

What I see you arguing is akin to saying that, circa 1945, it would be invalid to oppose racism because you were bullied in school, and thus empathized with people that were being bullied to an extreme degree all the time. I don't think that sort of argument makes much sense at all.

 

People draw sympathy from all sorts of things, and personal experience is one of them. I don't see sympathizing with people to be a bad thing.

 

Sympathizing with people is good, yeah. But making a false equivalency that belittles the suffering of others is not. It's like a person who skipped breakfast saying that they know just how starving kids in an impoverished third world nation feel. They don't; they voluntarily missed a single meal and are not at risk of not having available food when they are ready to eat again, whereas the starving kid may not have eaten in days and might never get to eat another bite in their life before dying of starvation. It's kind of offensive, really - what do they know about the suffering these kids might face?

Similarly, comparing a mildly embarrassing situation to a situation that can lead to depression, suicide, social ostracization, assault, and/or murder is kind of offensive.

 

 

As much as homosexuality plays heavily on the minds of some, I try to make it clear that when I see these things I intend to be colorblind, so I see try to see what's universal about these situations, what can be applied to anyone else.

You can't remove all societal context from a situation. It simply does not work like that. It's like calling a black person a certain racial slur and then saying "What's the big deal? I didn't mean that in an offensive way!" when he understandably gets mad.

Replying to Ymper here:

Thank Heavens I don't have to worry about things that much. For those who have it worse than me, dang. As I said, I pray for them. They have my sympathy and empathy. And I've been silent on the issue for too long, so as I began talking about this particular issue of mine, I wanted to bring attention also to what other people go through.

24601

Replying to Ymper here:

 

Thank Heavens I don't have to worry about things that much. For those who have it worse than me, dang. As I said, I pray for them. They have my sympathy and empathy. And I've been silent on the issue for too long, so as I began talking about this particular issue of mine, I wanted to bring attention also to what other people go through.

 

24601

The thing is, though, you really aren't. As I stated, you're establishing a false equivalency and belittling the problems of others. Don't get me wrong; I'm not accusing you of malicious intent. I feel you are simply misunderstanding and underestimating the actual severity of the situation that others go through.

Well, the thing is, unless these issues get talked about - preferably in a calm manner - won't some people always unintentionally underestimate the problems some people face? Someone staying "the heck away from the topic" doesn't really help anyone - it prevents confrontations about it, sure, but then someone is kind of forever doomed to be ignorant of a topic that they have shown something other than complete apathy about.

Correct.

Amendment: Perhaps you could stay the heck away from the topic in blogging until you have done research into it. Perhaps by contacting people who have lived the topic.